Estudos de Psicologia, 19(4), outubro a dezembro/2014, 288-295

Seo Generalista
Social skills of gifted and talented children
Maria Luiza Pontes de Frana-Freitas
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte

Almir Del Prette

Zilda Aparecida Pereira Del Prette
Universidade Federal de So Carlos

Abstract
There is a clear lack of empirical studies about the socio-emotional characteristics of gifted and talented children,
especially in the context of social skills. This study aimed to characterize the social skills of such children, identifying
similarities and differences in the skill repertoire in comparison with non-gifted children. The sample contained 394
children from 8 to 12 years old, of which 269 children were identified as gifted. All participants answered the Social
Skills Rating System and Socio-demographic Questionnaire. The results indicate a more elaborate social skills repertoire for gifted children in all categories with the exception of empathic skills. The implications of these results for the
planning of educational programs are discussed and future research directions are identified.
Keywords: social skills; giftedness; talent.

Resumo
Habilidades sociais de crianas dotadas e talentosas. A literatura apresenta escassez de estudos empricos e controvrsias
sobre as caractersticas socioemocionais de crianas dotadas e talentosas, especialmente no mbito das habilidades
sociais. Este estudo visou caracterizar o repertrio de habilidades sociais dessas crianas e identificar semelhanas e
diferenas em relao ao repertrio de crianas no dotadas. Participaram 394 crianas de oito a 12 anos e, dentre
essas, 269 identificadas como dotadas. Todos os participantes responderam ao Sistema de Avaliao de Habilidades Sociais e ao Questionrio Sociodemogrfico. Os resultados indicaram um repertrio mais elaborado de habilidades sociais
para as crianas dotadas em todas as classes, exceto nas empticas. Discutem-se implicaes desses resultados para o
planejamento de programas educacionais bem como questes adicionais para futuras pesquisas nessa temtica.
Palavras-chave: habilidades sociais; dotao; talento.

Resumen
Habilidades sociales de nios dotados y talentosos. La literatura presenta una escasez de estudios empricos y controversias sobre las caractersticas socioemocionales de nios dotados y talentosos, especialmente en el mbito de las
habilidades sociales. Este estudio tuvo, como objetivos, caracterizar el repertorio de habilidades sociales de esos nios e identificar semejanzas y diferencias en relacin al repertorio de nios no dotados. Participaron 394 nios de
ocho a doce aos, de los cuales 269 fueron identificados como dotados. Los participantes respondieron al Sistema de
Evaluacin de Habilidades Sociales y al Cuestionario Sociodemogrfico. Los resultados indicaron un repertorio ms
elaborado de habilidades sociales para los nios dotados en todas las clases, excepto en las empticas. Son discutidas
implicaciones de esos resultados para el planeamiento de programas educacionales, as como cuestiones adicionales
para futuras investigaciones sobre ese tema.
Palabras claves: habilidades sociales; dotacin; talento.

iftedness and talent have been only briefly discussed in the Brazilian context in comparison to other
Special Education topics. Moreover, the researchers
in this area typically utilize different concepts and terms to refer to the giftedness and talent (Gagn, 2009; Gardner, 1994;
Guenther, 2006; Renzulli, 1998; Sternberg, 2003). Here, we
adopt Gagns (2005) definitions: giftedness is the relatively
ISSN (verso eletrnica): 1678-4669

higher capacity of an individual in, at least, one domain of

human ability - general intelligence, creativity, socio-affective
ability, sensorimotor ability. In contrast, talent is defined as an
above average performance in a particular field. Gagn (2005)
considers that giftedness has an internal origin and organization, being related to brain functioning and based in specific
domains of human ability, aptitudes and attributes; talent is
Acervo disponvel em: www.scielo.br/epsic

Social skills of gifted children

the measurable expression of these abilities that has been developed under a given set of environmental conditions.
Brazilian research of giftedness and talent has mainly focused on education, public policies, identification of gifted
children, and programs to stimulate development and creativity (e.g. Alencar, 2007b; Fleith, 2006; Guenther, 2007), with
very few studies addressing the socio-emotional characteristics of gifted and talented children. This pattern is repeated
in the international literature, where there is a very limited
number of recent studies in this research area (Bain & Bell,
2004; Bain, Choate, & Bliss, 2006; Gross, 2002; Lehman & Erdwins, 2004; Moon, 2004; Norman, Ramsay, Roberts, & Martray, 2000; Silverman, 2002; Versteynen, 2001). Moreover,
these studies have frequently generated conflicting results,
possibly as a result of conflicting hypotheses about social adjustment in gifted children. While some researchers consider
gifted children to be more prone to socio-emotional adjustment problems, other researchers assume that gifted children
generally will, as a consequence of their gifts, have better capacity for socio-emotional adjustment (reviewed in Neihart,
1999; Richards, Encel, & Shute, 2003; Webb, 1993).
Specifically, many researchers believe that gifted individuals have a higher risk of emotional and social problems,
particularly during adolescence and early adulthood (Neihart, 1999). Under this model, gifted individuals are more sensitive to interpersonal conflicts and subject to higher stress
levels than their peers due to their cognitive abilities, and
consequently feel more depressed, anxious and suffer from
low self-esteem (e.g., Cross, 1998; Cross, Coleman, & Stewart, 1995; Gross, 2002, 2004; Moon, 2004, 2009; Peterson,
2009; Peterson, Duncan & Canady, 2009; Silverman, 2002).
Such characteristics would lead to difficulties in establishing
positive social relationships. Under the contrasting hypothesis, researchers consider gifted children to be better able to
understand themselves and others due to their elevated cognitive abilities and, therefore, to be better equipped to deal
with stress and social conflict (Neihart, 1999). Thus, several
studies suggest that gifted children show better socio-emotional adjustment than their non-gifted colleagues in terms of
depression and social competence (Bain & Bell, 2004; Baker,
2004; Howard-Hamilton & Franks, 1995; McCallister, Nash,
& Meckestroth, 1996; Merrell, Gil, McFarland, & McFarland,
1996; Nail & Evan, 1997, Neihart, 1999; Robinson & Noble,
1992; Sowa et al., 1994; Versteynen, 2001).
A possible approach for the socio-emotional analysis of
gifted and talented children is through the study of social skills
and social competences. According to Del Prette and Del Prette
(2001, 2008), social skills relate to the different classes of an
individuals social behavior that contribute to the quality and
effectiveness of interactions that they establish with others.
Social competence is the individuals ability to articulate feelings, thoughts and behaviors, depending on personal goals and
situational and cultural demands, with favorable consequences
for the individual and their relationship with others (Del Prette
& Del Prette, 2001; Del Prette & Del Prette, 2005).

289

Higher levels of social skills and social competence are associated with better quality of life, more rewarding interpersonal relationships, greater personal fulfilment, professional
success, and better physical and mental health (Bandeira, Del
Prette, Del Prette, & Magalhes 2009; Lehman & Erdwins,
2004). Children with positive interpersonal characteristics
(high self-esteem, academic or non-academic self-concept, social competence and, empathy and problem solving skills) are
more likely to achieve a satisfactory developmental trajectory
(Cia, Pamplin, & Del Prette, 2006). Conversely, the absence
of these characteristics is seen as a risk factor, which can lead
to behavioral or emotional problems and other psychosocial
problems (Cia et al., 2006; Del Prette & Del Prette, 2005; Feitosa, 2013; Medeiros & Loureiro, 2004). Peer relations and social competence are often included in assessments of a child`s
psychological adjustment (Neihart, 1999). Thus, researchers
(Bain et al., 2006; Cross et al., 1995; Galloway & Porath, 1997;
Garland & Zigler, 1999, Norman et al., 2000; Swiatek, 1995)
typically address the adjustment of gifted and talented children based on their social status, social skills (especially social
coping) and social competence.
Several studies have indicated that gifted and talented
children belong to a positively differentiated group in relation to their social skills and social competence (Galloway &
Porath, 1997; Hallahan & Kauffman, 2003; McCallister et al.,
1996). Such children frequently have characteristics common
in popular children, including a good social skills repertoire,
lack of behavioral problems, leadership skills, and high academic performance and high self-esteem (Bain & Bell, 2004).
For example, Lehman and Erdwins (2004) compared a group
of 16 intellectually gifted children with a group of children
with average intelligence. Two personality measures were
used as indicators of social and emotional adjustment and a
range of values and social attitudes were assessed. The high
performing group showed better social skills and more mature forms of interaction with others; valuing more democratic and cooperative interactions than the competitive ones. A
related study (Field et al., 1998) compared 62 intellectually
gifted students (IQ above 132) with 162 non-gifted (mean age
14 years), based on a Giftedness Perception Scale answered
by their teachers. The scale had items on academic and social
skills (making friends, starting conversation, understanding
people, having close friends, making jokes, etc.) and giftedness. Gifted students showed earlier social development and
better social skills when compared to their non- gifted peers.
Likewise, Czeschlik and Rost (1995) investigated the relationship between intelligence and the five sociometric categories
(popular, rejected, neglected, controversial and average)
in a sample of 5861 third grade children from 317 classes.
Students with higher IQ were identified as the most popular
among their peers. Chagas (2008) investigated the individual
and family characteristics of gifted students using the perceptions of their peers, families and teachers. Significantly, gifted children took responsibility for implementing activities and
were typically good humored. Richards et al. (2003) compared
the emotional and behavioral adjustment of 33 intellectually

290

Social skills of gifted children

gifted adolescents (identified by IQ) with 25 non-gifted

adolescents, using the Behavioral Assessment System for
Children (BASC). The intellectually gifted group had higher cognitive maturity, including advanced ability to solve
problems and lower levels of behavioural problem than their
non-gifted peers. Frydenberg (1997) reported differences in
the way that gifted young people deal with their concerns,
suggesting a focus on problem solving. Preuss and Dubow
(2004) found similar results: gifted students used more problem-solving strategies to deal with stress than non-gifted students. Gifted children also seem to have greater capacity to
address problems common to all children, possibly as a result
of their giftedness (Sowa et al., 1994).

There is clearly a need for quantitative research on social

skills of gifted and talented children, using a statistically representative sample. In order to characterize the social skills of
these children it is important to understand their socio-emotional needs, for planning educational practices and a greater
appreciation of their giftedness. Given the above, the objectives of this study were: (1) to characterize the social skills
repertoire of gifted and talented children, and; (2) to identify
similarities and differences between the social skills repertoire of gifted and non-gifted children.

Indeed, there is no reliable evidence that exceptionally high

ability alone is associated with socio-emotional problems (Freeman, 1998). Richards et al. (2003) suggests that claims about
the maladjustment of gifted children have been widespread
in the literature because the selection of participants in some
studies was biased; researchers identified gifted young people
who may have been at high risk of maladjustment. For example, young people with other disabilities, female adolescents
and adolescents with cultural and linguistic experiences or with
low socioeconomic status. Such samples are generally derived
from both clinical and case studies and lack appropriate comparison groups. Studies with these sampling characteristics
have frequently found socio-emotional difficulties in gifted and
talented individuals (Cross, 1998; Cross, Coleman, & Stewart,
1995; Gross, 2002, 2004; Moon, 2004, 2009; Peterson, 2009;
Peterson, Duncan, & Canady, 2009; Silverman, 2002).

This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the

Federal University of So Carlos, meeting the requirements
for human research (Protocol: 0668.0.000.135-09). The parents of the participants signed the Informed Consent Form
(ICF) and parents and their children received the necessary
information to understand the aims of the research.

In addition to the contradictions between studies and the

general scarcity of publications on socio-emotional characteristics of gifted and talented children (Dai, Swanson, & Cheng,
2011), there is a strong cultural belief that these children, in
general, are not well socially or emotionally adjusted. They
are frequently perceived as timid and excessively concerned
about academic study, with little social contact and difficulties
in their social relations. However, as mentioned, the empirical
data do not clearly support (or reject) the hypotheses of social
deficit or social advantage of gifted children.
In summary, there is still a very few studies on gifted and
talented children, and most of these exclusively focus on the
intellectual domain (identified by intelligence quotient tests)
to the detriment of other domains such as creativity, socio-affective and sensorimotor abilities. Thus, there is still lack of
research on: (a) the more sophisticated classes of social skills
in gifted individuals, and; (b) the possible relationships among
social skills classes, academic learning and creativity. For example, the skill to ask questions, to answer questions, and to
propose activities, etc. In the Brazilian research context, there
is a predominance of publications on cognitive characteristics
and educational needs of gifted and talented children population, and a considerable lack of empirical research on socio-emotional variables and social skills. Moreover, there is a
predominance of clinical case-studies and qualitative research
with very small samples, often derived from a single school or
program (Alencar, 2007a).

Method

Sampling
The sample consisted of 394 children (female and male)
between 8 and 12 years of age. From this sample, 269 children
were identified as gifted and talented, and 125 as non-gifted.
The following criterion was used to select gifted and talented
participants: giftedness in at least one human ability domain
(general intelligence, creativity, ability and socio-affective and
sensorimotor ability, as Gagn (2009). Gifted and talented
individuals were excluded if they did not undergo the standard process of identification of giftedness and talent in the
data collection centers. The research was conducted in regular
schools and two centers which have an educational program
for gifted and talented students: Center 1 in Lavras and Center 2 in So Jos dos Campos.
The majority of gifted and talented children enrolled in giftedness and talent development Centers were female (53.2%)
with an average age of 11 years old (SD = 0.911; range 8-12)
from public schools (91.1%) and were attending the 5th grade
of elementary school (50.9%).The 125 children identified as nongifted were enrolled in regular schools from the Brazilian public
school system linked to the Center 2. Most of the children were
female (63%) with an average age of 11 years old (SD = 0.54), and
were attending the fifth grade of elementary school. These children attended the same classrooms as the gifted children.

Instruments
The participants responded to two self-report instruments: a characterization questionnaire and a social skills
scale, the Social Skills Rating System (SSRS-BR). The socio-demographic questionnaire contained questions related
to the sample characterization, for example: age, gender and
school year. The SSRS-BR assesses social skills, problem behaviors, and academic competence and was originally produced in the U.S. (Gresham & Elliott, 1990) and validated for
the Brazilian sample (SSRS-BR, Bandeira et al., 2009). It has

291

Social skills of gifted children

three versions: version T for teachers (30 items), version P

for parents (37 items), and version C for child (27 items). The
validation for the Brazilian context showed that SSRS-BR has
satisfactory internal consistency, measured by Cronbachs
alpha on the scales of social skills (child=0.78; parents=0.86;
teachers=0.94); problem behaviors (parents=0.83; teachers=0.94) and academic competence (alpha=0.98). Furthermore, the validation also displayed positive and significant
correlations in the test-retest for all scales, demonstrating temporal stability (reliability). In this study, version C
(SSRS-C) was used which assesses social skills frequency
(0=Never, 1=Sometimes, 2=Very often) and is composed
by six factors with eigenvalues between 1.16 and 4.0; thus,
explaining 41,65% of the data variance: (i) Responsibility
(e.g., I leave my student desk clean and tidy), (ii) Empathy
(e.g., I try to understand how my friends feel when they are
angry, upset or sad), (iii) Assertiveness (e.g., I avoid doing
things with other people which can let me in trouble with
adults), (iv) Self-control (e.g., I finish disagreements with
my parents calmly), (v) Problem Avoidance (e.g., I ignore
other children when they tease me or call me names), and
(vi) Expression of Positive Feelings (e.g., I show or tell my
friends that like them). The Measure of Sampling Adequacy
was satisfactory (KMO = 0.79), the Bartletts test of Sphericity displayed significant results (X = 1561.23, df = 378, p
= 0.00) and was adopted loading factors greater than 0.32.
Considering the standard interpretation of the instrument,
the percentile interval from 1 to 50 concerns a lower to medium repertoire, the percentile interval from 51 to 100 regards a good to a highly elaborated repertoire and the percentile interval from 76 to 100 refers to a highly elaborated
repertoire.

Table 1
Absolute and Relative Frequency of Gifted and Talented Children in Each
Percentile Interval of Social Skills According to Self-assessment Through
the SSRS-BR
Percentile Intervals

1-50

Social Skills
HS Global Score
F1-Responsibility
F2-Empathy
F3-Assertiveness
F4-Self-control
F5-Problems avoidance
F6-Expression of Positive
Feelings

N
124
111
120
140
130
114
100

%
46.09
41.26
44.60
52.04
48.32
42.37
37.1

51-100
N
145
158
149
129
139
155
169

76-100

%
53.91
58.74
55.40
47.96
51.68
57.63
62.83

N
66
61
62
87
54
82
103

%
24.55
22.69
23.06
32.35
20.09
30.50
38.30

In general, gifted students showed a lower percentage

than the normative sample on the lower half of the percentile
distribution (below 46% of the sample, when the expectation
is approximately 50%) and higher than expected in the upper
range percentile (51-100).The exception in both cases was for
assertiveness factor (F3). Considering the upper end of the
scale (76-100, which comprises 25% of the normative sample), the percentage of gifted and talented children is above
the expected level for assertive skills (F3), avoidance of problems (F5) and expression of positive feelings (F6).
In addition to the analysis of percentiles, social skills of gifted children (N=269) and non-gifted (N=125) were compared
with the Students t-test for independent samples (Figure 1).
14

Procedure

11.72

12

Results
The social skills repertoire of gifted and talented children
was based on scores obtained from SSRS-BR and percentile
ranks. Table 1 provides the absolute and relative frequency of
participants distributed across percentile intervals (1-50, 51100 and 76-100) for each SSRS-BR subscale and for the total
score.

10

Average

The questionnaires were administrated to gifted and not-gifted children sample in schools and centers. The responses to SSRS-BR were tabulated as total and factorial scores,
according to the guidelines prepared by the Brazilian authors
(REF). The data and remaining socioeconomic indicators were
transcribed into spreadsheets and analyzed with the Predictive Analytics Statistics Software (PASW Statistics Base for
Windows, version 18.0).

10.38

9.91

8.99

5.69

5.33 5.55

6.36

7.16

7.69

6.74
6.01

4
2
0
Responsibility

Empathy

Assertiveness

Non-Gifted Children

Self-control

Problems
avoidance

Gifted Children

Expression of
Positive
feelings

Figure 1. Subscales Average Frequency for the Sample of Gifted and

Non-gifted Children.
The results showed a significant advantage [t (181.11) =
-6.53, p <0.001] in the social skills of gifted (M = 41.68, SD
= 5.36) as compared to not-gifted children (M = 36.71, SD
= 7.76). This difference is statistically significant for all subscales (p <0.05 for Problem Avoidance and p <0.001 for all others), except for Empathy [t (190.68) = -1.32, p = 0.188].
In order to refine the analysis, gifted children and non-gifted were compared only for the Center 2 sample (N = 86) where
the children live in the same town and attend the same regular

292

Social skills of gifted children

schools (N = 125). The results were similar to those obtained

with the general sample of children (Center 1 and Center 2),
once again showing a lack of difference only in the Empathy
subscale.
A weighted average (sum of scores on the items of each
subscale divided by the total number of items in each subscale,
with mean based on values for each group) was used to compare the subscales hierarchy of social skills among gifted and
non-gifted children. The data are illustrated in Figure 2, with
the subscales in descending order for gifted children sample.

2,0
2.0

1st

2nd

3rd

4th

1.5
1,5

5th

6th

1.0
1,0

0.5
0,5

0.0
0,0

F6 F6
- F6

F1F4- F4
F4F1
- F1
F3F2- F2
F2F3
- F3
Gifted Children Non-Gifted Children

F5 F5
- F5

Figure 2. Weighted Averages of the Social Skills Subscales in the Sample of Gifted and Non-gifted Children. F1=Responsibility; F2=Empathy,
F3=Assertiveness, F4=Self-control; F5=Problem Avoidance; F6= Expression of Positive Feeling.
The two samples coincided in the class of highest mean
score (Expression of Positive Feelings) and the lowest mean
score (Problem avoidance). In the other subscales, the sequence of higher scores for gifted children was Responsibility (2nd), Self-control (3rd), Assertiveness (4th) and Empathy (5th), and for the sample of non-gifted children it was
Self-control (2nd), Responsibility (3rd), Empathy (4th) and
Assertiveness (5th) (see Figure 2).

Discussion
This study demonstrated the superiority of the social
skills repertoire of gifted and talented children compared to
non-gifted as measured by the SSRS-BR (overall score and
subclasses), with the exception of empathic skills. These results are in complete contrast to the culturally embedded idea
that gifted children typically encounter difficulties in their
interpersonal relationships (Gross, 2004; Moon, 2009; Peterson, 2009) - at least within the conditions that are demonstrated in their social skills repertoire. Moreover, the results
are consistent with those obtained in other studies that classified gifted and talented children as having: (a) greater social competence (Galloway & Porath, 1997; McCallister et al.,
1996); (b) a well-developed social skills repertoire (Field et al.,
1998; Lehman & Erdwins, 2004); (c) superior ability to solve
problems (Richards et al., 2003), and; (d) excellent sociometric status (Czeschlik & Rost, 1995). It seems probable that
these skills enable gifted children to feel satisfied with their

relationships and quality of life (Bain et al., 2006; Lehman &

Erdwins, 2004).
Gifted and talented children primarily demonstrated a
significantly better skill to Express Positive Feelings. This
is a very important skill class for constructing emotional relationships between people (Del Prette & Del Prette, 2001).
However, although related to positive affect expression, there
was no difference between gifted children and non-gifted in
relation to the Empathy social skills subscale. This is interesting, especially considering that empathy was not among
the highest scoring in the hierarchy (Figure 2). It is possible
that the school and home environments of both groups of
children may not be conducive to the development this skills`
class (Pavarino, Del Prette, & Del Prette, 2005).
The skills within the Responsibility sub-class were the second most favored set for gifted children. There are skills demonstrating commitment to tasks and people within the school
environment. This class includes items such as: pay attention
when the teacher is teaching and follow his/her instructions,
leave the student desk clean and tidy, looking after personal
materials; make their own tasks within the allotted time and
properly use the free time. This result aligns with studies of
Bain and Bell (2004) and Chagas (2008), in which the gifted and
talented adolescents reported higher frequency of behaviors indicative of responsibility in carrying out activities.
The Self-control skill was one of classes more punctuated by gifted and talented children. This may suggest that in
their social interaction, the gifted and talented children can
control their emotions, for example, to control their anger at
tension times during the interaction, calmly finish fights with
theirs parents and listen to adults when they are talking. The
gifted child is able to understand himself and others better,
as well as to handle stress and conflicts better if compared to
their peers (Neihart, 1999). Bain and Bell (2004) and Richards
et al. (2003) claim that gifted children have low frequency of
behavior problems which may indicate that they have better
control of emotions and behaviors.
Both gifted and non-gifted children had the lowest score
on Problem Avoidance. This finding is unexpected, since the
literature indicates that gifted children have this skill well-developed in their behavioral repertoire (Frydenberg, 1997;
Preuss & Dubow, 2004; Sowa et al., 1994).

Final considerations
The results obtained with gifted and talented children in
Brazil were similar to those generated by empirical research in
other countries, indicating that these children should be considered as a distinct group when it comes to social competences (Bain & Bell, 2004; Baker, 2004; Galloway & Porath, 1997;
McCallister et al., 1996; Neihart, 1999; Versteynen, 2001).
A good social skills repertoire helps an individual to develop
rewarding interpersonal relationships which, in turn, lead to
greater personal and professional success and better physical
and mental health (Bandeira et al., 2009; Lehman & Erdwins,

Social skills of gifted children

2004). Thus, the results suggest that gifted and talented children are typically well adjusted, well suited to assume important positions in society and can generally expect a high quality of life. However, the results contradict long held beliefs
that gifted and talented children have more problems and
socio-emotional challenges, such as difficulties in establishing
satisfactory interpersonal relationships (Cross, 1998; Cross,
Coleman, & Stewart, 1995; Gross, 2002, 2004; Moon, 2004,
2009; Peterson, 2009; Peterson, Duncan, & Canady, 2009).
Specifically, this study contributes to a growing literature by: (a) highlighting the importance of obtaining additional
indicators to assess the social skills repertoire of gifted and
non-gifted children; (b) identifying several social skills classes
that are better elaborated in gifted and talented children. In
this case: Expressing Positive Feelings, Responsibility and Selfcontrol; (c) identifying a less elaborate repertoire of Empathy
skills in both gifted and non-gifted children. This information is
potentially useful for strengthening educational programs that
aim to develop the socio-affective domain of these children.
One limitation of this study is that the results were based
only on self-assessment of children. Evaluating multimodal
social skills and social competence is strongly recommended
by scholars in this area (Del Prette, & Del Prette, 2009). Thus,
further studies comparing different data sources (e.g., parents
and teachers) could broaden the understanding of the skills
repertoire, helping to identify the behaviour of gifted children
in different social contexts (e.g. family and school). In future
studies it would be interesting to adopt other experimental
designs, such as those that use observational methods (e.g.
video recording, self-registers, cursive and duration record
cursive, among others). Such an approach may help to refine
the assessment of child social competence and reduce some of
the potential biases inherent in self-assessment.
The study suggests several profitable avenues for future research with gifted and talented individuals, such as: (a) extending and refining the characterization of the social skills repertoire of gifted and talented children, using different informants and assessment procedures (parents, teachers, peers)
and different instruments/procedures (self-report, reports by
others, sociometric assessment, observation, etc.); (b) adopting a longitudinal design to characterize the development
of this skills repertoire at different times in the individuals
life cycle; (c) conducting intervention studies (experimental
or quasi-experimental) in order to explore the use that gifted
people make of their favorable socio-emotional repertoire in
other areas of activity, including those in which they are talented. Most importantly, research should be used to ensure that
the needs of especially gifted and talented children are being
met at school and at home.

References
Alencar, E. M. L. S. (2007a). Caractersticas scio-emocionais do superdotado:
Questes atuais. Psicologia em Estudo, 12(2), 371-378. doi: 10.1590/
S1413-73722007000200018

293

Alencar, E. M. L. S. (2007b). Criatividade no contexto educacional: Trs dcadas

de pesquisa. Psicologia: Teoria e Pesquisa, 23(5), 45-49. doi:10.1590/S010237722007000500008
Bain, S. K., & Bell, S. M. (2004). Social self-concept, social attributions, and
peer relationships in fourth, fifth, and sixth graders who are gifted
compared to high achievers. Gifted Child Quarterly, 48(3), 168-178. doi:
10.1177/001698620404800302
Bain, S. K., Choate, S. M., & Bliss, S. L. (2006). Perceptions of developmental,
social, and emotional issues in giftedness: Are they realistic? Roeper
Review, 29(1), 41-48. doi: 10.1080/02783190609554383
Baker, J. A. (2004). Depression and suicidal ideation among academically gifted
adolescents. In S. M. Moon (Ed.), Social/emotional issues, underachievement
and counseling of gifted and talented students (pp. 21-30). Thousand Oaks:
Corwin.
Bandeira, M., Del Prette, Z. A. P., Del Prette, A., & Magalhes, T. (2009).
Validao das escalas de habilidades sociais, comportamentos
problemticos e competncia acadmica (SSRS-BR) para o ensino
fundamental. Psicologia: Teoria e Pesquisa, 25(2), 271-282. doi: 10.1590/
S0102-37722009000200016
Chagas, J. F. (2008). Adolescentes talentosos: Caractersticas individuais e
familiares (Master Dissertation). University of Braslia, Braslia. Retrieved
from http://hdl.handle.net/10482/1227
Cia, F., Pamplin, R. C. O., & Del Prette, Z. A. P. (2006). Comunicao e
participao pais-filhos: Correlao com habilidades sociais e problemas
de comportamento dos filhos. Paidia, 16(35), 395-406. doi: 10.1590/
S0103-863X2006000300010
Czeschlik, T., & Rost, D. H. (1995). Sociometric types and childrens
intelligence. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 13(2), 177-189.
Cross, T. C. (1998). Developing relationships, communication and identity.
Gifted Child Today Magazine, 21(5), 28-29.
Cross, T. L., Coleman, L. J., & Stewart, R. A. (1995). Psychosocial diversity
among gifted adolescents: An exploratory study of two groups. Roeper
Review, 17(3), 181-185. doi: 10.1080/02783199509553655
Czeschlik, T., & Rost, D. H. (1995). Sociometric types and childrens
intelligence. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 13(2), 177-189.
doi: 10.1111/j.2044-835X.1995.tb00672.x
Dai, D. Y.; Swanson, J. A., & Cheng, H. (2011). State of research on
giftedness and gifted education: A survey of empirical studies published
during 1998-2010 (april). Gifted Child Quarterly, 55(2), 126-138. doi:
10.1177/0016986210397831
Del Prette, A., & Del Prette, Z. A. P. (2001). Psicologia das relaes interpessoais:
Vivncias para o trabalho em grupo (6th ed.). Petrpolis, RJ: Vozes.
Del Prette, Z. A. P., & Del Prette, A. (2005). Psicologia das habilidades sociais na
infncia: Teoria e prtica. Petrpolis, RJ: Vozes.
Del Prette, Z. A. P., & Del Prette, A. (2008). Um sistema de categorias de
habilidades sociais educativas. Paidia, 18(41), 517-530. doi: 10.1590/
S0103-863X2008000300008
Del Prette, Z. A. P., & Del Prette, A. (2009). Avaliao de habilidades sociais:
Bases conceituais, instrumentos e procedimentos. In: A. Del Prette, & Z.
A. P. Del Prette (Eds.), Psicologia das habilidades sociais: Diversidade terica
e suas implicaes (pp. 187-229). Petrpolis: Vozes.
Feitosa, F. B. (2013). Habilidades sociais e sofrimento psicolgico. Arquivos
Brasileiros de Psicologia, 65(1), 38-50. Retrieved from http://pepsic.bvsalud.
org/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1809-52672013000100004&ln
g=pt&tlng=pt.
Field, T., Harding, J., Yando, R., Gonzales, K., Lasko, D., Bendell, D., & Marks,
C. (1998). Feelings and attitudes of gifted students. Adolescence, 33(130),
331-342.
Freeman, J. (1998). The education of the very able: Current international research.
London: The Stationery Office.
Frydenberg, E. (1997). Adolescent coping: Theorical and research perspective. New
York: Routledge.

294

Social skills of gifted children

Gagn, F. (2005). From gifts to talents. In R. Sternberg & J. Davidson (Eds.),

Conceptions of giftedness (2nd ed., pp. 98-119). New York: Cambridge
University Press.

Peterson, S. J. (2009). Myth 17: Gifted and talented individuals do not have
unique social and emotional needs. Gifted Child Quarterly, 53(4), 280-282.
doi: 10.1177/0016986209346946

Gagn, F. (2009). Building gifts into talents: Detailed overview of the DMGT
2.0. In B. MacFarlane & T. Stambaugh (Eds.), Leading change in gifted
education: The festschrift of Dr. Joyce VanTassel-Baska (pp. 61-80). Waco, TX:
Prufrock Press.

Preuss, L. J., & Dubow, E. F. (2004). A comparison between intellectually

gifted and typical children in their coping responses to a school and a peer
stressor. Roeper Review, 26, 105-111. doi: 10.1080/02783190409554250

Galloway, B., & Porath, M. (1997). Parent and teacher views of gifted
childrens social abilities. Roeper Review, 20(2), 118-121. doi:
10.1080/02783199709553872
Gardner, H. (1994). Estruturas da mente:A teoria das inteligncias mltiplas (C.
Sandra, Trans.). Porto Alegre: Artemed.
Garland, A. F., & Zigler, E (1999). Emotional and behavioral problems among
highly intellectually gifted youth. Roeper Review, 22(1), 41-44. doi:
10.1080/02783199909553996
Gresham, F. M., & Elliott, S. N. (1990). Social skills rating system: Manual. Circle
Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
Gross, M. U. M. (2002). Social and emotional issues for exceptionally
intellectually gifted students. In M. Neihart, S. M. Reis, N. M. Robinson,
& S. M. Moon (Eds.), The social and emotional development of gifted children:
What do we know? (pp. 19-30). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
Guenther, Z. C. (2007). Centros comunitrios para desenvolvimento de
talentos. Revista Educao Especial, Santa Maria, 30(2), 120-130. doi:
10.5902/1984686X
Guenther, Z. C. (2006). Dotao e talento: Reconhecimento e identificao.
Revista Educao Especial, Santa Maria, 28(2), 195-208.
Hallahan, D. P., & Kauffman, J. M. (2003). Exceptional learners: Introduction to
special education. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Howard-Hamilton, M., & Franks, B. A. (1995). Gifted adolescents: Psychological
behaviors, values, and developmental implications. Roeper Review, 17(3),
186-191.
Lehman, E. B., & Erdwins, C. J. (2004). The social and emotional adjustment
of young intellectually gifted children. In S. Moon (Ed.), Social/emotional
issues, underachievement and counseling of gifted and talented students (pp.
1-8). Thousand Oaks: Corwin.
McCallister, C., Nash, W. R., & Meckstroth, E. (1996). The social competence
of gifted children: Experiments and experience. Roeper Review, 18(4), 273276. doi: 10.1080/02783199609553758
Medeiros, C. P., & Loureiro, S. R. (2004). Observao clnica do comportamento
de crianas com queixa de dificuldade de aprendizagem. In E. M.
Marturano, M. B. M. Linhares, & S. R. Loureiro (Eds.), Vulnerabilidade e
proteo: Indicadores na trajetria do desenvolvimento escolar (pp. 107-136).
So Paulo: Casa do Psiclogo.
Merrell, K. W., Gill, S. J., McFarland, H., & MacFarland, T. (1996). Internalizing
symptoms of gifted and non-gifted elementary-age students: A
comparative validity study using the internalizing symptoms scale for
children. Psychology in the Schools, 33(3), 185-191.
Moon, S. M. (2004). Social/emotional issues, underachievement, and counseling of
gifted and talented students. Thousand Oaks: Corwin.
Moon, S. M. (2009). Myth 15: High-ability students dont face problems
and challenges. Gifted Child Quarterly, 53(4), 274-276. doi:
10.1177/0016986209346943
Nail, J. M., & Evans, J. G. (1997). The emotional adjustment of gifted adolescents:
A view of global functioning. Roeper Review, 20(1), 1821.
Neihart, M. (1999). The impact of giftedness on psychological well-being:
What does the empirical literature say? Roeper Review, 22(1), 10-17.
doi:10.1080/02783199909553991
Norman, A. D., Ramsay, S. G., Roberts, J. L., & Martray, C. R. (2000). Effects
of social setting, self-concept, and relative age on the social status of
moderately and highly gifted students. Roeper Review, 23(1), 3439.
Pavarino, M. G., Del Prette, A., & Del Prette, Z. A. P. (2005). Agressividade e
empatia na infncia: Um estudo correlacional com pr-escolares. Interao
em Psicologia, 9(2), 215-225. doi: 10.5380/psi.v9i2.4799

Renzulli, J. S. (1998). The three-ring conception of giftedness. In S. M. Baum,

S. M. Reis, & L. R. Maxfield (Eds.), Nurturing the gifts and talents of primary
grade students (pp.1-25). Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
Richards, J., Encel, J., & Shute, R. (2003). The emotional and behavioral
adjustment of intellectually gifted adolescents: A multi-dimensional,
multi-informant approach. High Ability Studies, 14(2), 153-163. doi:
10.1080/1359813032000163889
Robinson, N. M., & Noble, K. D. (1992). Social-emotional development and
adjustment of gifted children. In W. Wang, M. Reynolds, & H. Walberg
(Eds.), Handbook of special education. Research and practice (Vol. 4, pp. 5776). Oxford, UK: Pergamon.
Silverman, L. K. (2002). Asynchronous development. In M. Neihart, S. M. Reis,
N. M. Robinson, & S. M. Moon (Eds.), The social and emotional development
of gifted children: What do we know? (pp. 31-40). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
Sowa, C. J., McIntire, J., May, K. M., & Bland, L. (1994). Social and emotional
adjustment themes across gifted children. Roeper Review, 17, 95-98. doi:
10.1080/02783199409553633
Sternberg, R. L. (2003). WICS as a Model of Giftedness. High Abilities Studies,
14(2), 109-137. doi: 10.1080/1359813032000163807
Swiatek, M. A. (1995). An empirical investigation of the social coping strategies
used by gifted adolescents. Gifted Child Quarterly, 39(3), 154-161.
Versteynen, L. (2001). Issues in the social and emotional adjustment of gifted
children: what does the literature say? The New Zealand Journal of Gifted
Education, 13(1), 1-8. Retrieved from http://www.giftedchildren.org.nz/
apex/v13art04.php
Webb, J. T. (1993). Nurturing social-emotional development of gifted children.
In K. A. Heller, F. J. Mnks & A. H. Passow (Orgs.), International handbook
of research and development of giftedness and talent (pp. 525-538). Oxford:
Pergamon.

Social skills of gifted children

295

Maria Luiza Pontes de Frana-Freitas, Doutora em Psicologia pela Universidade Federal de So Carlos
(UFSCAR), Psicloga Escolar Educacional da Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN).
Endereo para correspondncia: Escola de Cincias e Tecnologia (ECT) / Universidade Federal do Rio
Grande do Norte, Campus Universitrio Lagoa Nova, CEP 59078-970, Natal/RN. E-mail: mluizapf@
yahoo.com.br
Almir Del Prette, Doutor em Cincias (Psicologia Experimental) pela Universidade de So Paulo (USP-SP),
Professor Titular Voluntrio (aposentado) na Universidade Federal de So Carlos (UFSCAR). E-mail:
adprette@ufscar.br
Zilda Aparecida Pereira Del Prette, Doutora em Psicologia Experimental pela Universidade de So Paulo
(USP-SP), Ps-Doutora em Habilidades Sociais pela Universidade da Califrnia, Riverside, EUA (UNC),
Professora Titular Voluntria (aposentada) na Universidade Federal de So Carlos (UFSCAR). E-mail:
zdprette@ufscar.br

Recebido em 25. Set. 13

Revisado em 17.Out.14
Aceito em 06.Nov.14